Suit TOO Nice for interview???

[gdl203]

Originally Posted by lawyerdad

I agree. Some people might view a pocket square as excessively flashy or affected.

Ditto. Anyone who doesn't understand that success in an interview hinges not only upon answering questions correctly and displaying the right skills, but also on making the right first impression (which includes presentation and physical appearance) is IMO simply delusional.

 

[Margaret]

I understand where people are coming from with their suggestions about what could be considered flashy or pretentious, and agree with most of it, but remember that the impression you give in this regard will ride much more heavily on your attitude and how you carry yourself.

The junior-level candidate who shows up for an interview in bold chalkstripes, fancy braces, flashy cufflinks and bone-colored EGs may well turn people off, but it's more likely to be because he strides in like the second coming of Gordon Gekko and conducts himself in such a way that he makes it clear that the interview is his opportunity to size the firm up, not the other way around (it should be both, actually, but that's beside the point...).

My point is simply this: sure, try to use good judgement, but don't obsess about the details. Credentials and a positive attitude will carry the day.

 

[SGladwell]

I understand where the original poster is coming from. There are certainly situations (especially when one is just starting out career-wise, is appearing in court for a traffic violation, etc.) when prudence dictates that it is perhaps a bad idea to show up with chest framed by hand-picked stitching, sleeves capped in working buttonholes, and so on. Most (real, not Soft or Z) Zegna suits I've see fall outside of those bounds. However, once one is used to the superior comfort and breathability of such things showing up somewhere important in a glued-together apparatus is uncomfortable and possibly confidence-damaging. The solution, then, is to hunt for a good, well-constructed but machine-made suit that can be tailored to fit acceptably.

I just wouldn't pay a lot of money for such a thing, given how limited my use of it would be. But I have been keeping my eye out for such a thing during one my period thrift store strafings and recently concluded the search by finding two suits with potential for such occasions. The first is a well-fitting (at least so expected, after a nip in the waist of jacket and some taking in of the pants) and well made (canvassed construction, Super 100's wool) but perfectly bland blue-and-black patterned H. Freeman & Sons MTM; the second a dark grey with lighter grey stripes flannel RTW Hickey-Freeman that fortunately has adequate fabric stored under the hem to restore a 34" inseam. They are together worth to me about the ~$150 (including ~$14 each initial cost) they'll have cost me after alterations, but not much more than that...

I don't see a problem with the Charvet tie. The only ties that might be a no for most interviews are a numbered series Hermes (because they're the most likely to be known) or a current season Ferragamo (because the person on the other side of the conference table may be wearing the same tie).

Then again, when I did my round of jobtalks I was clearly dressed better than all but one of the thirty-odd men who interviewed me. (He was wearing either wearing bespoke Huntsman or something made for him in the same vein, and a Brioni tie that I almost wore to the interview myself but decided against at the 11th hour.) Pick stitching, seven-fold tie, pocket squares, brown shoes, the whole nine yards. Yet despite the controversial subject matter of my dissertation I was offered positions at several universities. Go figure.

 

[tiger02]

Originally Posted by SGladwell

Yet despite the controversial subject matter of my dissertation I was offered positions at several universities. Go figure.
SG, I know this is off topic and all, and this really isn't an attack, but come on now. When did controversy start being a discriminator in academia? Peter Singer and Cornell West are two of the most celebrated Princeton profs, for God's sake.

 

[Concordia]

One of the benefits of a more hidebound culture (New England preppy/trad, London at any level) is that everyone knows what to wear. You go to your tailor (be he in Mayfair, the City, or Maida Vale), get the uniform expected of you, and off you go. We seem to have lost that.

Anyway, well-dressed doesn't have to mean flashy. You have a bespoke relationship? Ask your tailor to build something respectable and a little dull, and your shirtmaker to make shirts that you can relax in. I'm in a business where I have to look like I belong in a room full of money guys but also have to have the option of being invisible when I'm finished talking. So I have meeting suits that are a little different from my "going out" suits. Not less good, just more discreet.

This may mean a medium-grey pindot suit with a slightly restrained silhouette, and shirts with soft collars/cuffs and subtle stripes rather than hard-edged white collars and cuffs.

And good black shoes are good black shoes. A non-expert shouldn't be able to tell that your black Cleverley cap-toes aren't Allen-Edmonds Park Avenues that just happen to fit really well. You'll walk taller and people will notice the shine, but that's all.

 

[SGladwell]

Originally Posted by tiger02

SG, I know this is off topic and all, and this really isn't an attack, but come on now. When did controversy start being a discriminator in academia? Peter Singer and Cornell West are two of the most celebrated Princeton profs, for God's sake.

There's controversy and they're controversy. America likes its rogue academics, that's for sure. But there's one topic that's sacred to American academia, and anyone who questions the CW with research is likely to face a wall of silence.

Just follow the careers of Walt and Mearsheimer over the next half decade and you'll see my point.

 

[lawyerdad]

Originally Posted by SGladwell

There's controversy and they're controversy. America likes its rogue academics, that's for sure. But there's one topic that's sacred to American academia, and anyone who questions the CW with research is likely to face a wall of silence.

Just follow the careers of Walt and Mearsheimer over the next half decade and you'll see my point.
You've discovered cold fusion?